07-15-2010, 12:03 AM
Tiff wrote:Gonzo, in all due respect, I don't think you tried too hard to understand Nagarjuna.
Perhaps not. With that in mind, I located an interesting essay at http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/nagarjuna.pdf. Therein, I found, the following on page 137 which was surprising since it seems applicable to our discussion:
In tandem with the extensive discussion of causality in the context of origination, cause and the like is an illuminating discourse on the subject of actions (Karma). The subject of actions is of course very close to that of causality as it deals with the working of cause and effect in the context of intentional actions performed by an agent, call him a moral agent if one will. Again, the subject is treated in The Foundation Stanzas of the Middle Way and there it occupies a chapter. In The Seventy Stanzas also it is given rather a lot of attention taking up, as it does, eleven stanzas. The discussion follows that found in The Foundation Stanzas of the Middle Way very closely. Here also the gripping analogy of the illusory emanation of the Tathagata is found, and the creative role of imagination or mental fabrication is expounded. of imagination or mental fabrication is expounded. The picture which emerges from three striking stanzas which appear uninterrupted by any auto- commentary6 is one of a phenomenal world animated by imagination, the creative power of consciousness, through a series of projections or emanations. It is a fascinating
vision and one that comes pretty near the conception of the Mind Only school, or to look further a field, some of the Cabalistic developments in esoteric Judaism. Of course Nagarjuna does tell us very emphatically elsewhere in the text that consciousness like everything else is empty.
Tiff wrote:I say this based on your responses that are so off target of what I'm saying. Such as this quote above here. I have declared nothing null and void, in fact, I wrote many times about the importance of avoiding nihilism and of not referencing a void. I thought I spelled it out quite clearly what I meant by this, and now you conclude the very thing I said Nagarjuna helps one to avoid, which is this sense that "nothing matters because its not real" which is a nihilist perspective.
Perhaps we are misunderstanding. If you read my statement entirely, I said, "It does not matter whether it is maya, insubstantial, empty, or void." Note the word "empty" From your prior post:
Tiff wrote:Because the person does the work themselves, the product is of their own effort. And it becomes a new dictum upon which all concepts that grasp at inherent exisitence (or nihilism) will fall flat upon the observer who realizes emptiness directly. One is liberated from grasping. Liberated from fear of the unknown. Liberated from the complexity born from ideas about individual essences. Liberated from the idea that one must change something about themselves in order to achieve enlightenment.
Still, there is nothing to change or achieve to realize emptiness and enlightenment in the sense that its erroneous to perceive we are not already that. Everything is already empty. But....it did not originate from a void and via this is inherently connected to emptiness. Rather what is here and now is empty. Absent as Lex said in last post.
Tiff wrote:Remember what happened to the guy who took the red wine, steak, and cigar though? hehe I prefer to learn, as much as I can about this extraordinary world, and to also unlearn what was incorrectly taught. If you say you are taking the steak, you are saying you are not curious and want to live in ignorance because its pleasurable to you. The guy's exact words in the movie "ignorance is bliss" then he died, lol. I say enlightenment is bliss!
Another way of looking at that scene is that the guy, given the choice of a stark grey-world exisitence eating food from a can, compared to being in the matrix and getting all the enjoyment out of life, chose the matrix and probably without regret even if his life was shorter, it was happier... ok, in the movie its understandable why this would be a choice (still not a good one imo, but makes some sense), but here, in our discussion, it's really does not correspond, because reading Nagarjuna does not put one in a stark grey world. One does not have to give anything up in terms of these life-expereinces, enjoying food, wine, cigars whatever. So again I think you are grossly misinterpreting things and its all within your own view and nothing new allowed into your field of perception.
The character "choosing" maya was also a traitor. What I found of interest is what you mention, that "reality" was represented as gray and bland, to include gray, ragged "monks" robes, existing in the gray innards of a machine. There were further depictions of "reality" vs "maya", in regard the choice of the red pill over the blue pill. Regardless, even though I mentioned the analogy, it seems an improbable leap of logic to imply gross misinterpretations and a lack of allowing 'new' into my field of perception.
What we begin to approach is the age-old question of purpose. That is, why are we here? Which will also ask, what/who are we, really? My own investigations have followed a different path than yours, yours more towards the intellectual, mine more towards the sensual. Garrison Keelor once said something like, "We are juicy beings", as indeed we are...mostly water - the whole business of being human is a senuous experience and I suspect one of the reasons we are here is to enjoy that.
Tiff wrote:Fullness. Why can't this fullness be empty of essence? Why do you see empty as desolate, null, void? I have never spoken of it this way. Are you not truly reading my words and instead bouncing your own ideas off and back to yourself without taking anything new in? Seems so to me. At the very least, try to let go of this null, blah, void thing. Its not even what I've been talking about.
I wasn't aware I saw empty as desolate, null or void. I saw it as empty, and I continue to disagree with it. Rather, the notion is of no value since I'm willing to accept what I perceive at face value and to enjoy it as it seems to be.
Tiff wrote:So order you a steak, pour some wine, and light up a stoogie and we can discuss Nagarjuna...or not...it matters not to me. Seems you are pretty much through with the discussion anyway. But I'm always willing to engage if you are.
Nah...I found the aforementioned essay on Nagarjuna, and I intend to spend some time with it.
Tiff wrote:When I was born, the three dog night tune was the top song that week...its in my bones, I love this world. Joy to it! So that much we have in common. Drama...I've had enough drama, can do without that...but will take adventure any day.
Heh. Seems to me adventure=drama. Drama usually has a bad name, since every family seems to have a drama queen of sorts, and most everyone else seems to be tired of it...but they aren't, really.
Perhaps not. With that in mind, I located an interesting essay at http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/nagarjuna.pdf. Therein, I found, the following on page 137 which was surprising since it seems applicable to our discussion:
In tandem with the extensive discussion of causality in the context of origination, cause and the like is an illuminating discourse on the subject of actions (Karma). The subject of actions is of course very close to that of causality as it deals with the working of cause and effect in the context of intentional actions performed by an agent, call him a moral agent if one will. Again, the subject is treated in The Foundation Stanzas of the Middle Way and there it occupies a chapter. In The Seventy Stanzas also it is given rather a lot of attention taking up, as it does, eleven stanzas. The discussion follows that found in The Foundation Stanzas of the Middle Way very closely. Here also the gripping analogy of the illusory emanation of the Tathagata is found, and the creative role of imagination or mental fabrication is expounded. of imagination or mental fabrication is expounded. The picture which emerges from three striking stanzas which appear uninterrupted by any auto- commentary6 is one of a phenomenal world animated by imagination, the creative power of consciousness, through a series of projections or emanations. It is a fascinating
vision and one that comes pretty near the conception of the Mind Only school, or to look further a field, some of the Cabalistic developments in esoteric Judaism. Of course Nagarjuna does tell us very emphatically elsewhere in the text that consciousness like everything else is empty.
Tiff wrote:I say this based on your responses that are so off target of what I'm saying. Such as this quote above here. I have declared nothing null and void, in fact, I wrote many times about the importance of avoiding nihilism and of not referencing a void. I thought I spelled it out quite clearly what I meant by this, and now you conclude the very thing I said Nagarjuna helps one to avoid, which is this sense that "nothing matters because its not real" which is a nihilist perspective.
Perhaps we are misunderstanding. If you read my statement entirely, I said, "It does not matter whether it is maya, insubstantial, empty, or void." Note the word "empty" From your prior post:
Tiff wrote:Because the person does the work themselves, the product is of their own effort. And it becomes a new dictum upon which all concepts that grasp at inherent exisitence (or nihilism) will fall flat upon the observer who realizes emptiness directly. One is liberated from grasping. Liberated from fear of the unknown. Liberated from the complexity born from ideas about individual essences. Liberated from the idea that one must change something about themselves in order to achieve enlightenment.
Still, there is nothing to change or achieve to realize emptiness and enlightenment in the sense that its erroneous to perceive we are not already that. Everything is already empty. But....it did not originate from a void and via this is inherently connected to emptiness. Rather what is here and now is empty. Absent as Lex said in last post.
Tiff wrote:Remember what happened to the guy who took the red wine, steak, and cigar though? hehe I prefer to learn, as much as I can about this extraordinary world, and to also unlearn what was incorrectly taught. If you say you are taking the steak, you are saying you are not curious and want to live in ignorance because its pleasurable to you. The guy's exact words in the movie "ignorance is bliss" then he died, lol. I say enlightenment is bliss!
Another way of looking at that scene is that the guy, given the choice of a stark grey-world exisitence eating food from a can, compared to being in the matrix and getting all the enjoyment out of life, chose the matrix and probably without regret even if his life was shorter, it was happier... ok, in the movie its understandable why this would be a choice (still not a good one imo, but makes some sense), but here, in our discussion, it's really does not correspond, because reading Nagarjuna does not put one in a stark grey world. One does not have to give anything up in terms of these life-expereinces, enjoying food, wine, cigars whatever. So again I think you are grossly misinterpreting things and its all within your own view and nothing new allowed into your field of perception.
The character "choosing" maya was also a traitor. What I found of interest is what you mention, that "reality" was represented as gray and bland, to include gray, ragged "monks" robes, existing in the gray innards of a machine. There were further depictions of "reality" vs "maya", in regard the choice of the red pill over the blue pill. Regardless, even though I mentioned the analogy, it seems an improbable leap of logic to imply gross misinterpretations and a lack of allowing 'new' into my field of perception.
What we begin to approach is the age-old question of purpose. That is, why are we here? Which will also ask, what/who are we, really? My own investigations have followed a different path than yours, yours more towards the intellectual, mine more towards the sensual. Garrison Keelor once said something like, "We are juicy beings", as indeed we are...mostly water - the whole business of being human is a senuous experience and I suspect one of the reasons we are here is to enjoy that.
Tiff wrote:Fullness. Why can't this fullness be empty of essence? Why do you see empty as desolate, null, void? I have never spoken of it this way. Are you not truly reading my words and instead bouncing your own ideas off and back to yourself without taking anything new in? Seems so to me. At the very least, try to let go of this null, blah, void thing. Its not even what I've been talking about.
I wasn't aware I saw empty as desolate, null or void. I saw it as empty, and I continue to disagree with it. Rather, the notion is of no value since I'm willing to accept what I perceive at face value and to enjoy it as it seems to be.
Tiff wrote:So order you a steak, pour some wine, and light up a stoogie and we can discuss Nagarjuna...or not...it matters not to me. Seems you are pretty much through with the discussion anyway. But I'm always willing to engage if you are.
Nah...I found the aforementioned essay on Nagarjuna, and I intend to spend some time with it.
Tiff wrote:When I was born, the three dog night tune was the top song that week...its in my bones, I love this world. Joy to it! So that much we have in common. Drama...I've had enough drama, can do without that...but will take adventure any day.
Heh. Seems to me adventure=drama. Drama usually has a bad name, since every family seems to have a drama queen of sorts, and most everyone else seems to be tired of it...but they aren't, really.